A. Field of the Invention
This invention relates generally to data processing systems, and more particularly, to electronic trading and settlement systems.
B. Description of the Related Art
Conventional trading and settlement systems generally involve large corporate customers, commercial suppliers, and large financial institutions (e.g., settlement banks). These systems trade using large amounts of paper. That is, conventional trading and settlement systems create “paper trails” that serve to lengthen a business transaction from the initial order to the final payment.
For example, a customer may place an order (e.g., a purchase order) with a supplier. Once the supplier receives the order, the supplier creates a packing slip, and ships the order to the customer. With the shipment of the order, the supplier includes an invoice for the order. The invoice generally requires payment within a standard time period set by the supplier (e.g., 30 days). In practice, however, many customers may take up to 60 days to settle their outstanding accounts with suppliers. Thus, it may take over two months from the time a customer places an order and it is shipped to the time the supplier receives a payment. Aside from the reduced cash flow and/or credit risk born by the supplier before receipt of payment, the customer must process (either manually or electronically) each invoice and account with the supplier.
In response to the inherent problems with conventional trading and settlement systems, more and more suppliers and/or customers are switching to the Internet, and trading and settling “online.” That is, systems such as supply side trading systems that use normal trading terms (e.g., remit payment 30 days) offered by business solution firms, such as ORACLE, COMMERCE ONE, or ARIBA.
Although these electronic trading and settlement systems create an electronic marketplace that enables both customers and suppliers to trade online, the trading system does so at a high price. That is, unless all parties (e.g., customers, suppliers, settlement banks) are “wired,” the benefits of electronic trading and settling is not realized. In other words, it may be that the customer has built a large infrastructure capable of complete automated ordering, however, unless the supplier has reciprocal functionality, the customer must resort to more conventional ordering (e.g., paper purchase orders) to engage the supplier. Although the benefits are obvious, nevertheless, both customers and suppliers have been slow to adopt electronic trading and settling. Thus, there is a need to for a system that encourages both suppliers and customers to adopt electronic trading and settlement capabilities.
Therefore, there exists a need to improve existing trading and settlement systems by enabling electronic invoiceless trading and settlement systems that provide incentives for both customers and suppliers to trade and settle electronically. Such a system should not only offer a tangible incentive to both customers and suppliers, but also it should place little to no risk on the settlement bank.